Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Add correctness, reliability, usability and verifiability from Ghezzi…
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
…1991 text book
  • Loading branch information
Ao99 committed Nov 20, 2019
1 parent 7f2d140 commit 5ddc85f
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 2 changed files with 23 additions and 1 deletion.
Binary file modified StateOfPractice/QDefOfQualities/QDefOfQualities.pdf
Binary file not shown.
24 changes: 23 additions & 1 deletion StateOfPractice/QDefOfQualities/QDefOfQualities.tex
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -170,6 +170,11 @@ \subsection{\notdone{Correctness} \oo{owner}}
\citet{VanVliet2000}.)
\end{defn}

\begin{defn}
``A program is functionally correct if it behaves according to its stated
functional specifications'' \citep{ghezzi1991fundamentals}.
\end{defn}

\noindent \textbf{Proposed Definition}

Definition~\ref{CorrectDefnSelected}
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -302,6 +307,11 @@ \subsection{\notdone{Reliability} \oo{owner}}
\citet{VanVliet2000}.)
\end{defn}

\begin{defn}
``Informally, software is reliable if the user can depend on it''
\citep{ghezzi1991fundamentals}.
\end{defn}

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@smiths

smiths Nov 20, 2019

Owner

Does Ghezzi also give a formal definition of reliability? I thought they also had a definition based on stats?

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@JacquesCarette

JacquesCarette Nov 20, 2019

Collaborator

The above is the informal definition given on p.19, and there's a stats-based one in a later chapter.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@smiths

smiths Nov 20, 2019

Owner

That's what I thought. @Ao99, please add the stats-based definition to our document.

\noindent \textbf{Proposed Definition}

\wss{Needs to be completed.}
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -377,7 +387,9 @@ \subsection{\notdone{Performance} \pmi{owner}}

\noindent \textbf{Proposed Definition}

Combined definition \ref{PerformanceDefnSelected} and \ref{PerformanceDefnSelected2}: The degree to which a system or component accomplishes its designated functions within given constraints, such as speed
Combined definition \ref{PerformanceDefnSelected} and
\ref{PerformanceDefnSelected2}: The degree to which a system or component
accomplishes its designated functions within given constraints, such as speed
(database response times, for instance), throughput ( transactions per second),
capacity (con-current usage loads), and timing (hard real-time demands).

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -439,6 +451,11 @@ \subsection{\notdone{Usability} \jc{owner}}
\citet{VanVliet2000}.)
\end{defn}

\begin{defn}
``A software is usable - or user fridendly - if its human users find it easy to
use'' \citep{ghezzi1991fundamentals}.
\end{defn}

\noindent \textbf{Proposed Definition}

\wss{Still needs to be completed}
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -1070,6 +1087,11 @@ \subsection{\notdone{Verifiability} \wss{owner}}

\wss{When I get the Ghezzi text back from Olu,
I'll check to see if they have anything to add to this definition.}

\begin{defn}
A software system is verifiable if its properties can be verified easily
\citep{ghezzi1991fundamentals}.
\end{defn}

\noindent \textbf{Proposed Definition}

Expand Down

0 comments on commit 5ddc85f

Please sign in to comment.